The Effect of Team-Leadership Modes on Team Performance: A Preliminary Study Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 33, 2006 THE EFFECT OF TEAM-LEADERSHIP MODES ON TEAM PERFORMANCE: A PRELIMINARY STUDY Peter Markulis SUNY Geneseo Markulis@geneseo.edu Avan R. Jassawalla SUNY Geneseo Jassawal@geneseo.edu Hemant Sashittal St. John Fisher College sashi@sjfc.edu Daniel R. Strang SUNY Geneseo Strang@geneseo.edu Paul Scipione SUNY Geneseo Scipione@geneseo.edu ABSTRACT 2. to have the workshop participants “experience” various team-leader modes and to discuss their experiences, A quasi-experimental research study was conducted based on a 2004 ABSEL workshop on team leader selection. The study found that there was no statistically significant difference in the three team-leader modes (rotating, emerging and designated) and team project performance. The study also found that while most students (80%) felt that all students should have an opportunity to lead a group, only half felt it was not the responsibility of the business school to train them as leaders. The study discusses the implications of the results, particularly for instructors who use the team format. 3. to have the workshop participants assist in the partial design of a classroom experiment which could be conducted on the subject of team- leadership. This paper focuses on the third objective of the 2004 ABSEL workshop. The authors designed and implemented an educational experiment using the some of the suggestions given at the 2004 team-leader workshop. BACKGROUND INTRODUCTION Books, articles, monographs and studies of all sorts abound in the area of both teams and leadership. Teams and teamwork have become an industry standard. Lawler and his colleagues, for example, citing a university of California study, found that 68% of Fortune 1000 companies used self- managing work teams (Lawler, Mohrman and Ledford, 1992). At the 2004 annual ABSEL conference, a workshop was conducted on team-leadership (Markulis, et al. 2004). According to the workshop presenters, the workshop had several objectives: 1. to review the literature on team leadership as used in the classroom, Interesting, however, the subject of leadership on teams has received less treatment. There have been some studies on professional teams (sports and business) but few studies have been offered in the area of team-leadership in the 247 mailto:Jassawal@geneseo.edu mailto:Strang@geneseo.edu mailto:Scipione@geneseo.edu mailto:markulis@geneseo.edu mailto:sashi@sjfc.edu Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 33, 2006 METHODOLOGY classroom, at least at the college level and/or in business schools. A highly touted book on teams, for example, covers many subjects relating to the development; structure and constructive use of student teams in the college classroom, but makes no mention of team-leadership (Michaelson, 2002). An issue addressed in the 2004 workshop was “What team-leader mode is the most appropriate one for students?” Based on the discussion at the workshop session, that meant “which mode leads to the best team performance?” A quasi-experimental design of team leadership using (Campbell & Stanley, 1963) was developed. The experiment used a within subjects, post-test format. The experiment took place at a medium sized university with undergraduates, most of whom were business majors. The authors located an instructor who taught three sections of an Organizational Behavior class. The instructor agreed to allow her classes to be used for the experiment, although she herself was not involved in the experiment per se (control for instructor bias). In each section, there were 6 student teams with between 5-6 students randomly selected for each team (for a total of 18 teams and 77 students). One can assume that the students chose their class section based on convenience or some criteria other than their knowledge that they would be assigned to a specific team-leader mode. There is no reason to assume that there was any bias in the course selection (randomization). The researchers acknowledge that the students in the classes may have interacted with each other in terms of discussing their team modes. Nonetheless, experimenters assume that there is no reason to believe that students were overly concerned about the team-leader modes and their interactions in this area were minimal and casual (experimental control). The workshop presenters had hypothesized that there were three fundamental team-leader modes, • Designated • Rotating • Emerging The presenters did not state that one was superior, or indicate that one better served some pedagogical objective better than another. The modes themselves were in part derived from a review of the literature and in part based on natural taxonomy. Taking these three basic modes as fairly discreet approaches to team leadership the authors devised an experiment where the three modes could be tested in a classroom setting. The Designated Mode. The designated mode is where the team leader is assigned by the instructor, similar to what a manager may do with a work team. In this experiment, the instructor chose the team leader based on a volunteer from the group. If no one volunteered, she simply chose one. Since the instructor did not know the students from previous classes, the choice was usually random. The instructor gave each team the same semester long team-based project. At the end of the semester, the instructor graded the semester long team projects for each team. On the last class day, the authors then asked each student to complete a short questionnaire on their team- related experiences during the semester (Appendix 1). The instructor provided to the authors the team grades and these- -along with the survey results--were analyzed. The Emerging mode. Emerging leaders are those with no formal authority or appointment, who are perceived by team mates as having substantially influenced the team (Schneider and Goktepe 1983, Taggar et al 1999). Emerging leaders best represent what the professional literature calls self-managing teams. No leader is assigned or appointed, but one or more emerge as the project moves forward. RESULTS A major objective of the study was to determine if team-leader mode affected project performance. Table 1 indicates the grade distribution for the teams in each of the classes. Project grade was determined by the instructor of the course, who was not part of the original research project. The Rotating Mode. Finally, the rotating mode is where the instructor appoints each member to lead the team for a set period of time, after which the leader role rotates to another member. Some instructors may feel that it is only fair that all have an opportunity to lead a group. Erez, Lepine, and Elms, for example, found that when every member has the opportunity to experience the team leader’s responsibilities, s/he is likely to extend more efforts and greater cooperation towards goal achievement and ultimately feel higher levels of satisfaction (2002). An ANOVA (team leader mode as factor, team grades as dependent variable) shows no statistically significant difference (see Table 2) among the three team-leader modes and project performance. A second area of concern raised by the participants of the 2004 ABSEL workshop on team-leader modes was the issue of school’s (or instructor’s) responsibility to help TEAM-LEADER Designated Emerging Rotating Table 1: Grade Distribution of Teams for Final Team-base Project MODE TEAM 1 TEAM 2 TEAM 3 TEAM 4 TEAM 5 TEAM 6 87 88 93 85 90 84 84 85 93 88 82 87 87 85 93 90 80 87 248 Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 33, 2006 Table 2: ANOVA Results of the Team-leader mode on Team Performance (Actual final grade) Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups .010 2 .005 .040 .961 Within Groups 9.062 74 .122 Total 9.072 76 Table 3: Is it the responsibility of the Business School to train students to be leaders? Observed N Expected N Residual Yes 46 (59.7%) 38.5 (50%) 7.5 No 31 (40.3%) 38.5 (50%) -7.5 Total 77 Chi-Square (1 degree of freedom) = 2.922 Yes, everyone No, only qualified pe Total The minimum expecte “train” students to be l students to serve in a l workshop participants fe leadership skills or desir to lead a group, while ot to let all students have th than they could experien some leadership capacity All students partic research project were Appendix A: survey qu percent (59.7%) of s responsibility of the bu leaders (40.3% disagree while 80% feel that all lead. Tables 3 & 4 sh results. The chi-square test ( insignificant, suggesting answer to the other (s (80.5%) of the students f chance to lead the gro (with expected proportio significantly held in the apparent linkage betwe responses to questions a schools to train students everyone should have a Table 4: Should everyone have had a chance to lead a group? Observed N Expected N Residual 62 (80.5%) 38.5 (50%) 23.5 ople 15 (19.5%) 38.5 (50%) -23.5 77 Chi-square (1 degree of freedom) = 28.688 d cell frequency is 38.5. eaders or offer the opportunity for eadership capacity. Several of the lt that only students who “showed” es should be given the opportunity hers believed that it was only “fair” e opportunity, if for no other reason ce what it would be like to serve in . ipating in the team-leader mode asked about these issues. (See estions 19 & 20). Nearly sixty tudents’ believe that it is the siness school to train them to be with the statement in question 19), students should have a chance to ow the chi-square values for these with expected proportion = 50%) is that students do not favor one ee Table 3). Over eighty percent eel that everyone should have had a up. The associated chi-square test n = 50%) shows that this belief is sample (see Table 4). There is no en leadership modes, and student bout the responsibility of business to be leaders, and whether or not chance to lead a group (Q 19, 20 on the survey); i.e., the chi-square test of association is insignificant. Similarly, cross-tabulation of responses to questions 19, and 20 show an insignificant linkage in the responses to these two questions. So, students feel strongly about the school’s responsibility to allow all students to lead a team, but they do not think the school has a responsibility to “train” them to be leaders. Additional findings, particularly those on team dynamics, will be reported in a forthcoming article in the Journal of Education in Business. DISCUSSION A major objective of this study was to determine if team-leader mode ipso facto affected project performance. Based on the results of this study, it is clear that there is no difference. Of course, this study needs to be replicated elsewhere to see if this finding is upheld in different settings with more diverse student teams. That being said, it is an important finding in that it encourages instructors who use teams to think clearly about how to organize and structure their teams. Is there a specific pedagogical purpose which the instructor has for the team (teleological or process or both?) and the team project? If team-leader mode does not affect the team’s project performance, instructors must consider other relevant variables, like homogeneity, size, experience, task-type and many other variables spelled out in the literature. Instructors must also determine what 249 Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 33, 2006 REFERENCES interventions they may want to provide to the teams. For example, if the instructor wants to teach the team about team dynamics or processes, s/he may want to manage the team carefully and intervene when necessary. Aplin, John C. and Cosier, Richard A. (1978) "Creating a Responsible Managerial Experience". Exploring Experimental Learning: Simulations and Experiential Exercises, 5, 121-126. On a related observation, it is interesting to note that many organizations seem to be moving toward the self- managing team format (Manz and Sims 1987, Taggar, Hackett and Saha 1999, Wolff, Pescosolido, and Druskat 2002, Seers, Petty, and Cashman 1995, O’Brien and Buono 1999, Seers et al 1995). Given this, instructors may want to consider how best to equip students for this eventuality. It would almost seem like the emerging mode would be best. One might hypothesize that this mode may have produced better team performance had the instructor in our experiment “intervened” with training, counseling etc. However, given the nature of this limited experiment, we asked the instructor not to intervene or manage any of the modes, unless a very serious problem arose. One major shortfall in the classroom is the range of skills among the students. Often work teams are selected precisely because members possess a special or unique skill from which the entire team project can benefit. In most undergraduate classes though, there is considerable homogeneity, particularly in terms of student experiences (this may not be true in masters level courses). So, using the emerging mode may present a real challenge to instructors. Boss, R. Wayne (2000) "Is the Leader really Necessary? The Longitudinal Results of Leader Absence in Team Building." Public Administration Quarterly, 23, 471- 487. Buckenmyer, J. A. (2000) "Using teams for class activities: Making course/classroom teams work." Journal of Education for Business, 76 (2), 98-107. Butler, John K., Cantrell, Stephen, and Flick, Randall (1999) "Transformation Leadership Behaviors, Upward Trust, and Satisfaction in Self-Managed Work Teams." Organization Development Journal, 17, 13-29. Campbell, Donald T. and Stanley, Julian C. (1963) "Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research." Chicago, Ill.: Rand McNally & Company. Erez, A., Lepine, J. A. & Elms, H. (2002) "Effects of rotated Leadership and peer evaluation on the functioning and effectiveness of self-managed teams: A quasi- experiment." Personnel Psychology, 55, 929-949. Jalajas, David S. and Sutton, Robert I. "Feuds in Student Groups: Coping with whiners, martyrs, saboteurs, bullies, and deadbeats." The Organizational Behavior Teaching Review, 9, 217-227. LIMITATIONS & FUTURE RESEACH Jassawalla, A. R., & Sashittal, H. C. (2000) "Strategies of effective new product team leaders." California Management Review, 42 (2), 34-51. One limitation of the study is the university in which the experiment was conducted. The student population of the university is fairly homogeneous and therefore, the authors of this study encourage other researchers to try and replicate this study in more diverse undergraduate settings. A second limitation of the study is the use of the project team grades to measure team performance. One could argue that there are many factors which make up team performance. The authors also are seeking ways to refine the measurement of team projects. The grades in Table 1 probably are indicative of what happens to the grading of most team-based projects, i.e., there is not a lot of grade discrimination among the team grades. Also, the authors are not sure if the instructor modified the grades for each individual on the team based on peer evaluations. Finally, there are the team-leader modes themselves and the ability to tightly control their implementation over the course of a semester. No one can be sure the students actually used the modes in a careful, consistent and reliable way throughout the semester. Johnson, David W. and Roger T. (1984) "Structuring Groups for Cooperative Learning." The Organizational Behavior Teaching Review, 9, 187-198. Jones, Douglas W. (1996) "Empowered teams in the classroom can work." The Journal for Quality and Participation, 19, 80-87. Kayes, Anna, B., Kayes, D. Christopher, and Kolb, David, A. (2005) "Experiential learning in teams." Simulation & Gaming, 36 (3) 330-354. Kline, T. (2003) "Teams That Lead: A Matter of Market Strategy, Leadership Skills, and Executive Strength." London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. Kovach, Barbara E. (2002) "Predicting leaders and team leaders in times of great change." Journal of American Academy of Business, 1, 256-261. Loo, Robert and Thorpe, Karran (2002) "Using reflective learning journals to improve individual and team performance. Team Performance Management, 8, 134- 139. In terms of the team-leader modes, the authors are presently engaged in a research project to ascertain what team-leader modes business school instructors are currently using—if any—in their classes as well as to solicit their views on the a range of questions and issues regarding the team-leader mode concept. Markulis, Peter, et. al. (2004) "Team Leader Selection— Does It Matter?" Developments in Business Simulation & Experiential Exercises, 31. Michaelson, Larry, K, Knight, Arletta Bauman and Fink, L. Dee (2002) "Team-Based Learning: A Transformative Use of Small Groups." Westport, Connecticut: Praeger Press. 250 Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 33, 2006 Wolff, Steven B., Pescosolido, Anthony T., and Druskat, Vanessa U. (2002) "Emotional Intelligence as the basis of leadership emergence in self-managing teams." The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 505-522. Miles, Sandy J. and Mangold, Glynn (2002) "The impact of team leader performance on team member satisfaction: the subordinate’s perspective." Team Performance Management, 8, 113-121. Mohrman, S.A., Cohen, S.G. & Mohrman Jr., A.M. (1995) "Designing Team Based Organizations: New Forms of Knowledge Work." San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Murrell, Kenneth L. and Christian, Martin (1992) "Beyond O.D., Q.C., P.M., STS, TQM, TQI, et.al: Empowering organizations to redesign and transform themselves." Developments in Business Simulation & Experiential Exercises, 19, 249. O’Brien, Charlene D. and Buono, Anthony F. (1996) "Creating a networked, learning organization in the classroom." Journal of Management Education, 20, 369-382. Perry, Monica L., Pearce, Craig L. and Sims, Harry P. (1999) "Empowered selling teams: How shared leadership can contribute to selling team outcomes." The Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 19, 35-52. Roberto, Michael A. (2001) "Group Decision Simulation: Examining Procedural Justice in Group Decision- Making Processes." Developments in Business Simulation and Experimental Learning, 28, 207-209. Schneider, C. E., & Goktepe, J.R. (1983) "Issues in emergent leadership: The contingency model of leadership, leader sex, leader behavior". In H.H. Blumberg, A. P. Hare, V. Kent, & M.F. Daview (Eds.), Small Groups and Social Interactions (Vol. 1), Chichester, England: Wiley. Seers, A., Petty, M.M., & Cashman, J. F. (1995) " Team- Member Exchange under Team and Traditional Management: A Naturally Occurring Quasi- Experiment." Group and Organization Management, 20, 18-38. Taggar, Simon, Hackett, Rick, and Saha, Sudhir (1999) "Leadership Emergence in Autonomous Work Teams: Antecedents and Outcomes." Personal Psychology, 52, 899. Thacker, Rebecca A. and Yost, Christine (2002) "Training students to become effective workplace team leaders." Team Performance Management, 8, 89-95. Verderber, Kathleen S. and Serey, Timothy T. (1996) "Managing in-class projects: Setting them up to succeed." Journal of Management Education, 20, 23- 29. Weinkauf, Katharina and Hoegl, Martin (2002) "Team leadership activities in different project phases." Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 8, 171-182. Wheatley, Walter J., Armstrong, Terry R., and Maddox, Nick E. (1989) "The impact of leader and team member characteristic upon simulation performance: A start-up study." Developments in Business Simulation & Experimental Exercises, 16, 13-16. 251 Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 33, 2006 252 APPENDIX A Survey (of team leader modes) Team Number_________ (to determine which team leader mode the student team was assigned to use) Using the scale below, write the appropriate number next to the questions 1-18. 1=Never 2=Almost Never 3=Rarely 4=Sometimes 5=Frequently 6=Most of the time 7=Always _____1. Our group worked on all the parts of the project as a team. _____2. In general, all group members contributed to the project. _____3. There was a balance of workload among team members. _____4. Our team meetings were well organized. _____5. There was conflict in our group. _____6. Our meetings had written agendas. _____7. There was a clear leader present at our group meetings. _____8. There was good communication among our team members. _____9. The leader/facilitator of our group positively affected team communication. _____10. Group members were accountable for how they performed. _____11. Our group had penalties and/or rewards for member contributions/behaviors. _____12. Our team leader/facilitator was effective. _____13. Our team was highly cooperative. _____14. Team members provided constructive feedback. _____15. Communication was open and honest. _____16. Our team leader/facilitator contributed to positive group dynamics. _____17. Our team leader/facilitator contributed to positive group performance. _____18. Our group had a high level of tension. Circle the best answer for questions 19. Is it the responsibility of the School of Business to train students to be leaders? A. Yes. B. No. 20. Do you feel everyone should have a chance to lead a group? A. Yes, everyone should. B. No, only qualified people should. Table of Contents Volume 33, 2006 Learning Assurance Using Business Simulations Applications To Executive Management Education Team Teaching In An Integrated Business Course Using Critical Problem Based Learning Factors In An Integrated Undergraduate Business Curriculum: A Business Course Success Personality Type And Strategic Planning Business Games As Strategic Management Laboratories The Relationship Between Students' Success On A Simulation Exercise And Their Perception Of Its Effectiveness As A PBL Problem Forecasting Accuracy And Learning: The Key To Measuring Simulation Performance The Business Strategy Game: A Performance Review Of The New Online Edition Using The Socratic Method And Bloom's Taxonomy Of The Cognitive Domain To Enhance Online Discussion, Critical Thinking, And Student Learning Using Negotiation Exercises To Promote Critical Thinking Skills Effective Leadership Experiences For Management Majors In A Futures Class The Role Of Learning Versus Performance Orientations When Reacting To Negative Outcomes In Simulation Games Is Pay Inversion Ethical? A Three-Part Exercise Simulations And Experiential Exercises - Do They Result In Learning? Have We Figured It Out Yet? Examining Program Management In Business Simulations: Student And Faculty Views Validating Business Simulations: Do Simulations Exhibit Natural Market Structures? Characterizing Business Games Used In Distance Education Utilizing Games In A Graduate Level Instructional Game Course Employment Interview Preparation: Assessing The Writing-To-Learn Approach Simulations - Bridging From Thwarted Innovation To Disruptive Technology Creating An Authentic Cultural Lens Using Case Dialogue Learning By Fire: Reflections Of A First Time Online Instructor An International Internship With A Service-Learning Focus Learner Participation In The Online Learning Experience: Help Or Hindrance? Any Given Sunday: Intervention In Pursuit Of Simulation Team Parity Beginning With The End: Creating An Experiential Exercise From Assessment Criteria Simulating Life Cycles: Life Span As The Measure Of Performance In Business Gaming Simulations It's Puzzling: Communications, Competition, And Cooperation Balanced Scorecard Implementation For Strategy Management: Variation Of Manager Opinion In Real And Simulated Companies Cases And Business Games: The Perfect Match! Three-Attribute Interrelationships For Industry-Level Demand Equations Using A Web-Based Module To Teach Information Literacy Decision Support System For Demand Forecasting In Business Games The Invalidity Of Profit=F(Market Share) PIMS Validation Of Marketing Games Online Market Test Laboratory With The MINSIM* Program The Gas Mileage Game - A Policy Simulation Delivered Cost And Differentiation Applied To Threshold 3rd Ed. The Effect Of Team-Leadership Modes On Team Performance: A Preliminary Study The Design And Use Of A Macroeconomics Simulation Using Maple Software: A Pilot Study The Instructor's Toolbox: A Meaning-Centered Framework For The Social Construction Of Experiential Learning Incorporating Strategic Product-Mix Decisions Into Simulation Games: Modeling The 'Profitable-Product Death Spiral' Group Composition And Groupthink In A Business Game A Direct Approach To Teaching Business Ethics A Decision Support System For Planning Sales, Production, And Plant Addition With Manager: A Computer Simulation Polish - American Entrepreneurial Business Cooperation Workshop Utilizing The Income/Outcome Simulation Student Leader Training Exercise Student Preference To Mode Of Learning In Hong Kong Experiential Learning For Technology-Based And Management Programme In Hong Kong: A China Study Tour A Price Game With Product Differentiation In The Classroom Discrete Event Modeling In A New Transportation Simulation Supply-Side Modeling In A Total Enterprise Simulation The Quality Game Towards A Massive Multiplayer Online Business Simulation Making The Connection: Improving Virtual Team Performance Through Behavioral Assessment Profiling And Behavioral Cues Individual Learning Producing A Learning Organization: 'Playing Dice With Polar Bears' Narratology and Ludology: Competing Paradigms or Complementary Theories in Simulation Framework For Evaluating Internet Research Using Children's Games To Illustrate Strategy Concepts: Is Less Better?